Where's the Samsung shaped dent in the universe?

No one can look at Samsung's mobile products over the last decade and not consider them anything other than a ruthless, relentless copy of everything popular that's came before.

It's not that Samsung doesn't continuously push the limits of hardware specifications and capabilities as much if not more than anyone else. They do. But they do so by systematically, institutionally copying what other vendors have already done first.

Samsung does it to such a degree, and with such a consistency, that it's flabbergasting they can show up in court, swear an oath, and claim anything otherwise. Now they could claim it doesn't matter, that all phones and tablets and icons should look alike, and would be understandable as a strategy. But claiming they don't copy? Absurd.

Before the iPhone, Samsung copied the BlackBerry with the BlackJack. RIM sued, and Samsung changed the name to Jack, but kept the same design. Then, as now, they looked at the market leader and rather than asking how they could make "what's next", they asked how they could make what would be as close as possible "next to" it on a shelf. Rather than setting a course for the future, they set out to subsume the present.

Following the iPhone, when Apple showed the industry what "was next", rather than trying to do to the iPhone, and later the iPad, what Apple did to Palm and BlackBerry, Table PC and netbooks, Samsung conscientiously, deliberately, made their own smartphones and tablets look and work as close to indistinguishably from Apple products as possible. They started with the Instinct and kept right on going with the Galaxy series.

And they didn't stop with iPhones or iPads, either, but shamelessly copied everything from icons to interfaces, plugs to ports, dongles to desktops. They cloned devices, like they had Photoshops's stamp brush made manifest on the factory floor.

This year Samsung introduced the Galaxy S III and began to visually differentiate themselves from Apple. The shape was less a slab and more a river-stone, the charging was inductive, the sharing a physical tap away, and the screen would even ripple like water when you touched it... Just exactly what Palm did with webOS and the Pre back in 2009.

As a gadget lover, even if you love Samsung, even if you don't want to admit it, it's a huge disappointment. A splinter in the mind that mars what are otherwise phenomenal devices. A shadow in the periphery that stops you from enjoying the full light of their accomplishments.

Even if you can rationalize "a black slab is a black slab" it's impossible to rationalize "a yellow flower on blue background icon for photos is a yellow flower icon on blue background for photos", or "the shape of AC adapters, dock cables, and desktop computers are..." well, you get the idea. Even if you can dismiss individual instances as coincidences, when taken as a whole, it's impossible to dismiss the depths of Samsung's unoriginality as anything other than blatant, bold-faced copying.

And lets face it, it works. Hitching their design train to Apple's engine has helped make Samsung the most successful Android manufacturer on the face of the earth, and the only truly profitable one. That is no doubt tremendous incentive, and explains why Samsung did it, and while they'll likely continue to do it.

But as someone who marveled at the Handspring Treo, the BlackBerry, the iPhone, the Palm Pre, and the Nexus One, seeing the perpetual lack of innovation exhibited by Samsung is disheartening. Call Apple's litigations "anti-innovation" all you want, but how can you not recognize copying threatens innovation just as much as over-litigation, if not more? How can you not see how its end result is a depressing future filled with me-too products that do everything but delight and inspire?

I'm not ready to be done yet. I'm not ready to concede that the iPhone at Macworld or the Pre at CES are the last time I'll truly be amazed by leaps forward in mobile. I'm not ready to accept a years-long drought filled with cheap knock-offs and increasingly conventional, commodity devices.

I bought and owned a Nexus One. I bought and own a Nexus 7. I'd buy and own another HTC or Motorola Nexus in a heartbeat. I've never had the slightest urge to buy or own a Samsung mobile device -- because I already have a Treo and an iPhone, an iPad and a Palm Pre.

I would love to add a Samsung device to that list, an original, novel, inspiring take on mobile from one of the giants of the industry. The Galaxy Note and the upcoming Galaxy Note 10.1 are a start, but there has to be something beyond "with a stylus". There has to be a Samsung device that could be, for once, at the head of the design curve. A Samsung device that other manufacturers look to for inspiration and take their turn in copying outright.

Regardless of how the Apple vs Samsung trial turns out, that's the challenge Samsung faces. To move from replication to innovation. To take their place as not only a market leader but an industry leader. To stop copying the present and claim a role in shaping the future.

Apple II. Mac. iTunes. iPod. iPhone. iPad. Apple's has done it over and over again. Trinitron. Walkman. Sony has done it too, as have others.

Samsung has a chance next year. No doubt there'll be a Galaxy S4/Galaxy S IV, and no doubt Samsung is already planning it. They have a chance to zag instead of zig, to do something as original as Apple did in 2007 and Palm did in 2009. I sincerely hope they take it.

I hope they put a Samsung shaped dent in the universe.

Update: After a couple years of trying to go its own way, it looks like Samsung has once again decided that aping Apple design is a better strategy. I hope the company changes its mind again, though. We don't need iPhone 6, Apple Pay, and Touch ID clones. We need something that forces Apple to push ahead.

Reader comments

Where's the Samsung shaped dent in the universe?

knock off might be a bit harsh. they have some cool software/hardware designs that I would love Apple to implement. I wouldn't at all be upset for them copying/stealing them (and would it really be mentioned that way?). I wouldn't defend that they didn't copy a model and use it to build theirs. However, where the phone (not cheap accessories) design lies, its not a knock off. It did build off it of it however. That is an apparent truth.

*edit: this is in response to Renie's comment. comment 8. not sure why it's up at the top of the comments.

Rene you are the lead editor on this site yet often times I think it is your articles that are the most BS. I think you should try and be more professional with the articles you post and be less fanboyish. You have got to be the worse Apple fanboy I've ever come across.

Maybe that's why you run this site? Who knows... but often times I can't take your articles seriously. At first I thought it was iMore that couldn't be taken seriously... but then I read other contributors' articles and realized it was primarily you.

Try and be more professional and you'll probably be respected more not just by Apple users but by users of other products as well.

Samsung is definitely important in the world. They make everything from mobile electronic devices to TV's, fridges and stoves. Samsung is pushing the limits of what can be done with mobile technology. Their tablets aren't necessarily market leaders yet... I like their Galaxy Note 10.1 but I wish it had a higher resolution screen. But when it comes to mobile phones they are the top dog right now... Samsung Galaxy S3 is the best phone on the market... and its sales numbers show that.

You can't hate on a company because the icon on its phone is a graphic of a clock "just like Apple" has a graphic of a clock for its clock app icon. What do you expect Samsung to do? You want them to put a picture of a cat to represent the clock???

Samsung: great hardware, crappy software. But without them, there would be no iPhone.

I should state that in my opinion, there are only 3 companies that are able to create great consumer platforms at the OS level: Apple, Google, and Microsoft. If anyone else is fiddling with the core OS, I don't want their product.

What I am saying is that you are going on and on about these tiny details and are not looking big picture. You're worked up because of the colour of an icon or that the same type of picture is on an icon. You show a picture of a Samsung Galaxy S phone with it's app drawer open and compare it to an iPhone even tho that app drawer is not the default interface for an Android phone. You show a Galaxy Tab 10.1 beside an iPad with the Galaxy Tab not in its standard interface orientation.

You are looking at these smaller details and not looking big picture. If you do look big picture you would see that overall the devices are substantially different. And despite claims made by some... people who use these products are not going to confuse one company's product for another.

I am not going to deny that there are details that are similar between Samsung and Apple products... Samsung wants to win over Apple consumers and familiarity is a large part of that. I am saying that overall Samsung devices are not just copies of Apple products... and that if you look at the device overall they are different.

Apple started working on their tablet in 2003, this morphed into the iPhone, and through all those years Apple solved problems that didn't exist in the mobile space yet, what do you do with spurious inputs from your face while talking on the phone? How do you in the best and easiest way lock/unlock a phone without it happening in your pocket? How do you handle quick typing on a touch screen when the nuts and bolts latency of the tech gets in the way? How do we present websites that are optimized for 1024x768 or larger on a 3.5" display?

No one asked those questions before the iPhone came along, do you think Samsung did? What kinds of devices do you think they worked on while Apple worked on the iPhone?

"No one asked those questions before the iPhone came along, do you think Samsung did? What kinds of devices do you think they worked on while Apple worked on the iPhone?"

Actually Samusng did. I use to own the Samsung i730, a phone that existed before the iPhone. I used to use their browser to view websites all the time. This browser had the ability to pinch and zoom and reflow text.

The quote you are referring to comes from Steve Jobs 1995. The Lost Interview

In response to the question "But how do you know what's the right direction?" Steve Jobs said:

"Ultimately it comes down to taste. It comes down to trying to to expose yourself to the best things humans have done and then try to bring those things in to what you are doing.

Picasso had a saying. He said good artists copy great artists steal. We have always been shameless about stealing great ideas. I think part of what made the Macintosh great was that the people working on it were musicians and poets and artists, and zoologists and historians who also happened to be the best computer scientists in the world. But if it hadn't been for computer science these people would have all been doing amazing things in life in other fields. And they brought with them to this effort [the Macintosh project] a very liberal arts attitude that we wanted to pull in the best we saw in these other fields into this field. I don't think you get that if you are very narrow."

So the oft used quote is about about bringing parts of other disciplines, from literature, art and culture, into computer science and product design.

What would, to use Jobs term, being very narrow mean in practice? Well it could mean endlessly dredging up a sentence from a Steve Jobs interview in 1995, taking it out of context, fetishising it, implying it is about one thing when it is about another, and then using it to prop up a delusional world view and a deliberately fallacious argument in defence of crass product cloners. That sort sort obtuse and pedantic behaviour leaves people without a shred of intellectual dignity and should be avoided like the plague.

That's awfully small minded of you @Jackstah although your android fanboy buddies would be proud. This is Samsung's business model. Copy then innovate. They are not "important" they are fraudulent copycats with slick slimy suits taking ideas from apple, sony,volvo, maytag, DAF, Hyundai, motorola, nokia to name a few. They are important to consumer tech as diseases are important to decrease surplus populations. Which is they are not and should be eliminated from the face of the earth.

Yep, Apple has been stealing ideas for decades, but I'll give them credit for one thing - they have the balls to openly steal things, and then turn around and claim they invented those things and sue others for "stealing" them from Apple! It started with the original Apple "WIMP" (Windows, Icons, Mouse & Pulldown Windows) interface - which they openly copied from the original PARC Star workstation, and then turned around and accused Microsoft of stealing from THEM with Windows.

Stealing ideas is something Apple only believes in in one direction, nothing new about that at all.

That's a little harsh. I'm not gonna lie when I first joined here I thought Rene's articles were a little monogamous but this IS an Apple forum. And Rene has some great articles. We all love Apple here that's why we are here. To me your def an android fanboy but do I care? No. That's your decision , but to say the S3 is the best right now is WRONG that phone sucks ... It lags, it's glitchy, has a grainy screen, unorganized ....list goes on. And I know because I owned it and returned it.... My mom also has one and is getting rid of it as soon as the next iPhone comes out. But hey, whatever floats your boat bud ..

"To me your def an android fanboy but do I care? No. That's your decision , but to say the S3 is the best right now is WRONG that phone sucks ... It lags, it's glitchy, has a grainy screen, unorganized ....list goes on."

You know this is an Apple site right? At the very least you shouldnt be suprised or upset to find an anti-samsung article. If you dont want to read articles that favor Apple, then dont visit this site. Also your personnal attack on Rene dillutes your point. If you disagree with this article, you can create your own "MoreSamsung" site. Besides, this article is opinion. You are not required to agree. You do not have to prove that your opinion is correct either. Rene is guilty of nothing but typing errors in this article. Perhaps you should no longer be a patron of this site.

That's because you haven't came across me yet. They copy of Apple and they always have. Look at their usb cord for god sake. The SGSIII is the best phone on the market now because it the newest phone out right now. And to tell you the truth my brother has one and complains about it to me all the time. He asks why it stutters and lags. And asked me why does his iPod touch have a better looking screen then his phone. How well do you think the SGSIII will sell in four weeks? I mean I like and have stuff from both Android and iOS. But come on man it is what it is. Android was a rip off and Sammy devices are. Get over it.

Your brother says his ipod touch screen is better than his S3 screen? Who is your brother? Stevie Wonder? There is no way in hell a sane person would say that. You're a Pure Apple Stan if you utter such words. You fanboys amaze me.

Samsung makes beautiful devices. Run like crap though, and rarely get updated. As long as you don't expect your Samsung SuperPhone to make BlueTooth connections, have a working GPS, or stay connected for the whole call, or not Force Close when you go in, out, and back in to an app, then they are pretty neat gadgets to take pictures with. (Outstanding cameras). Of course if you want a phone that actually DOES all the neat stuff on the box instead of just looking like the phones that do....

(Proud ex-owner of Samsung Epic 4G and Motorola Droid3 (thank-you eBay!). But my poor orphaned Pre and Pre3 and new iPhone4S all still work!)

Samsung is nothing more than a technological copycat. That's the point. Anyone who can't admit that is nothing but a covert Apple Hater. There's tons of haters, that's why Dell computers are so prevalent...most people have no taste or sense that they are being duped.
Besides, why an American would choose to admire a South Korean company over an American company, the greatest technology company in the history of America, borders on the unpatriotic.

Mr. Ritchie, you're an excellent writer and many, many owners of iPads, iPhones and iPods agree with your observations; of which even a blind man would pick up on.

I agree with almost everything you say. Rene sounds like a real fanboy who goes to every Android forum to shout that the iPhone is better. Yes, Samsung did take some inspiration from Apple (which some may call copying), but it is just NOT a fact that Samsung is doing wrong here. Is it really that awful that Samsung also has a sunflower in their gallery app? Some people might think so, some people think not, but that's just pure opinion.
And right now, Rene, your opinion shows way, way too much Apple fanboism. (I'm not talking about this editorial alone. Every time I see a post on iMore which I think is 'fanboish' I think in myself, "Hmm, that's probably Rene" and that's the name I see when I scroll to the top.)

So wait... You skipped over all of the other examples and went for the easiestly dismisable item which is icon colors? Why not the design choice from the palm pre, why not the design choice from the iPhone 3G? Why not the design choice from the Siri rip off that is 'S voice'? One has to wonder why in your long posts you focus on in the one small example that maybe could have some doubt about blatant copying and not pointing out our trying to defend any of the other examples... For all those wondering, I'll save you some time... It's because your argument is weak at best. That is not to say that 'copying' isn't an industry practice as a whole because it definitely is but c'mon let's call a spade a spade regardless of what other contributions to technology a manufacturer had made.

i love both device designs equally (s3 and 4s), that being said, every bit of technology copies one another. i can't remember which podcast it was from (AC or iMore), but when it was compared to refrigerator designs, they all copy one another. Look at another example, cars. Audi had some cool LED designs in their headlights...now everyone has them. To my knowledge, they haven't taken anyone to court over it. Apple makes a HUGE deal about their million and one patents and they have a right to, but lets be honest, its annoying as hell to have a company taking everyone to court. i hate the court system for all of this.

copying/similarities in design is inevitable and is the way of the technology world. Apple just needs to keep innovating and lay off the complaining about the companies chasing them.

Re: "Apple just needs to keep innovating and lay off the complaining about the companies chasing them."

Why, exactly, should Apple let competitors profit from Apple's original work?
Just because you think so? Or because there's a logical reason?

Re: "copying/similarities in design is inevitable and is the way of the technology world."

And the copiers usually pay royalties for the use of patented designs. For example, half of all Android hardware makers pay Microsoft licensing fees. Because they use technology that Microsoft has patented.

Except Apple didn't try and license its patents except for its insanely high amount that they knew Samsung would not pay. Apple wants their product to be the only one hence why they try and get every other product banned. And I'm not talking about Samsung they tried with HTC and moto without offering to license.

Rene you had me going on this article. I was kind of in your corner saying yeah I can see that. Until...

You went & posted that pic of the Galaxy S APP drawer, not the home screen, side by side with the appalling & boring iOS springboard launcher. I tuned out afterwords. Having owned an original Galaxy S & iPhone 3G, when I held them side by side the last thought furthest from mind was it's an iPhone copy. I'm still confused to this day how someone can hold these devices, much less look at them side by side, & not see the obvious differences. At least you chose (or did you?) to not use the obvious Photoshop that Apple famously was sending around showing the phones being the same size.

I'll disagree with the above comments. Your articles have been genuinely good & reasonable lately. Especially the editorials. But you went off the rails here & bought the Apple flame bait from the Cupertino crazies.

Everybody has an off day here & there. So I still like you. Just save the obvious link bait pieces.

"Look at HTC. Look at Motorola. No one is accusing them of copying Apple or others. Why is that?"
Rene I honestly believe if HTC or Motorola had a phone selling as well as the GS3 right now, they would be in the line of fire as well.

Quis, that's the best statement in favor of understanding the core value of Samsung I've heard from folks in this public debate. Were Samsung's sales really boosted by the shape and markings on the USB connector and the power adapter? Almost assuredly not. And so therefore why do it? They do it because they know that with Apple products it's the entire experience, from the packaging right down to the connectors, from the look of icons to the scroll bounce. Someone above your post mentioned the LED headlights on Audi which others now are doing. Yes, those other companies stole the idea (another favorite defense) but they stole neither the implementation nor the entire car. Would you agree that Audi innovated that design element? Because realize that before the LED headlights there was another copy-along trend going on: BMW's "angel eyes" were being copied in the aftermarket. So you have to look at the why: Why did Samsung change their designs as soon as the iPhone became all the rage? Samsung didn't change their phones to some new and innovative design. They changed their design to match in many ways the design another company spent years working on. That's what Apple is upset with. Back to the dock connector, for the end of this response: Apple is rumored to be changing the dock connector after nine years -- let's come back and revisit this when Samsung responds, okay?

The interesting thing is how few similarities there are, I would expect more if they were explicitly copying.

What's come out of the trial so far is mainly the Apple side of the case, and Apple also have a good 'propaganda machine' via all the blogs that follow Apple.

What not being reported is all the prior art that's in the Samsung case (or was argued out), Kiddler tablet etc.

Also Samsung filed a design patent for something like the F700 before the iPhone was ever released, OK it's a slider but it has a large screen, few buttons, rounded corners etc. see https://p.twimg.com/AzjeaiXCMAI5T1L.png:large

But you can simply press one button on the Samsung phone and that screen shows up... and then it infringes on Apple's design and trade dress.

It doesn't matter if one screen is a home screen and the other is an app drawer. The point is... that other screen shouldn't look like that at all.

It would be like two books with different covers... but the content inside of one is plagiarized from the other.

I could probably ignore the app drawer argument... if there weren't so many other infringements. In total I see the icons, the pagination dots, the gray dock background, the cable, the charger, the packaging, the same product poses in advertising, and so on.

There are probably many other things Apple is accusing Samsung of copying..

And do tell which version of the Galaxy S I, II, or III that combines all of that so called trade dress or infringement? Certainly not a North American version.

That reasoning you are using works many ways friend. I can probably use that analogy & find many things Apple has copied by saying once you get past the home screen it looks the same. I'm just wondering... When the Galaxy S series was announced & released in 2010, did you immediately see all of those issues? Or Did you wait for Apple to cry foul then have an epiphany?

I think most geeks will know that is the app drawer and not the Home screen. Also don't forget that those screens are what Samsung uses in promo and ad material, what they show on commercials, etc.. for a long time that's what I remember seeing on TV and in print ads when they advertised those phones. Why do you think they did that? While we may know the difference, the general public typically does not. When they see those screens next to an iPhone they assume they're simliar enough to buy either. I think that kind of borders on deception don't you?

I certainly don't remember any advertising from a US based carrier that used the app drawer prominently to show the Galaxy S phones. I even just checked YouTube to see if they had old ads posted like you describe. Cannot find any. But if you have some feel free to share.

Are we at the point now that we are going to claim Apple has sacred advertising too?

Here is one example that has a stock samsung image, checking phone arena's device pages back in 2011 and 2012 show tons more that used the app drawer for stock imagery aka ad prints, etc (again i never even said just tv media, i said marketing materials which means print, online, etc not just tv). I don't think i ever said Galaxy S specifically either but just to humor you, here IS a galaxy S phone that did this....

http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-GALAXY-S-WiFi-4.0_id5391

FYI, i never said apple had sacred advertising or that samsung was copying their advertising. I said they used things like the app drawer to make the phones look more iPhone like. there's a huge difference from what you're implying i said and what i actually did say.

And in case you want more, do a google search for "galaxy s wifi 4.0 ads" or any other earlier galaxy phone - it will yield tons of stock imagery that was used in tons of places to market the phone using the app drawer, not the main screen...

So where in any of that advertising did it mention looks like the iPhone or copies iPhone? I looked at it all & didn't find it said that anywhere.

And maybe I'm wrong but isn't phonearena also a tech blog? That is a little like a poll commissioned by say NBC news to determine what is & isn't news . I don't think phonearena speaks for Samsung or their marketing dept. And the Google search yielded just as many ads not using the app drawer as it did using it. But we can continue to cherry pick what suits our view of the facts if you wish.

I'm not quite sure how you keep pulling content out of my post that isn't even there. Of course they wouldn't say that. How does that make any logical sense at all? Apparently the problem is you don't understand what stock imagery is. In short, it is images the company allows press and media sources to publish (print, web, mail, etc). Most of what you see are stock images provided by Samsung. I also never said ALL of them were like that but a lot were. I remember seeing best buy put up in store posters using those images as well as putting them in their weekly ads. Other stores too. My point was that they used those app drawers for promotional material. I found it funny they would do that for any other reason that to purposely make it look like an iPhone. I'm not quite sure why you are arguing other points I never even attempted to make.

And when did I put words in your mouth? Let me reread what I wrote again...

Nope not once did I imply it was your statement or I was speaking on your behalf. So let's not continue this path of discussion. I simply retooled to your points with my own. Point-counter point. Nothing more.

Not that it matters to this discussion either but my full time job is that of a graphic designer for one of the worlds largest & most profitable auto makers. I'm quite familiar with stock imagery but thank you anyway as others may not be. I still fall to see the use of sick imagery as blatant copying. The whole graphic design business is built on stock imagery. Trust me when I tell you that in the auto industry it's a heavy challenge to keep being original.

Wow. Again, you completely misunderstood my post. I'm not quite sure how you keep misconstruing what I am saying each and every time. For re-reading so much, you sure fail to understand what you're even making a counterpoint on.

This is one of those arguments where, as you lose, you gradually change the topic, right? :) Why would the Samsung ads SAY they were copying the iPhone? The evidence is the photos themselves, which were chosen because they look like the iPhone springboard. She proved her point, that Samsung chose to display the appdrawer instead of the android homescreen, to highlight the similarities with the iPhone. You have proven the point that you can't read or make a coherent argument. Point, counterpoint.

Rob White: Why try to suddenly narrow the argument to US based carrier advertising? Most all companies that produce product for sale build a marketing kit for the press that includes ready-made artwork for publication. It is this work on the part of the manufacturer that helps ensure consistency and brand awareness among the public. So instead of looking at the end of the chain (newspapers, TV ads from retailers, etc.) you should go back to the source and see what the manufacturer is doing to visually represent their product. In light of that, and since there is much discussion here about an app drawer view not being the real experience or whatever, I went to Samsung's website to see how they, the manufacturer, are representing their product. Take a look and tell me if this is the app drawer: http://www.samsung.com/us/system/consumer/product/sg/ht/76/sght769nkbtmb... That image is the top image on the product page at http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-T769NKBTMB I assume it is the app drawer based upon everyone who likes Samsung and disagrees with Apple's assertion that this is blatant copying telling us that the pictured comparison in the trial is not fair since Apple's home screen is only being compared to the app drawer. Lest you reply that I was cherry-picking the image that most simulates an iPhone home screen (there are other images on that product page that don't appear to infringe on Apple's work) I chose the TOP image. If you visit the similar-purposed page at Apple, http://www.apple.com/iPhone, you see two images -- of which only one conveys that same purpose -- but that's the whole point: Samsung themselves consider the TOP-most image important enough to convey to the world that they have a grid of icons to help you quickly locate the app you're looking for. Is that the only way to successfully sell a smartphone? Arguments could go either way, but look at http://www.htc.com/us/smartphones/ -- They've done something differently. So at what point do you have to say that copying Apple has led to success for Samsung? They copied the packaging -- did they have to? Do most Samsung buyers buy an iPhone first and then their Samsung and say, "oh wow, this phone will really work for me because the packaging experience is so close to Apple's"?!? They copied the connectors -- did they have to? Do most Samsung buyers buy an Apple iOS product first and then feel they'll be successful with their Samsung phone because the connectors look the same (but aren't so actually will be problematic)?!? They copied the icons and the arrangement -- did they have to? At some point it passes a tipping point of being copied because there's just no other way humans will readily understand something, to being copied for copying sake.

The reason you see the app drawer comparison to the iPhone is because that's what Samsung has in their marketing and promotional material. Why on earth does Samsung use a picture of the app drawer instead of their home screen? Even on the BOX for Christ sake.

If you don't think the galaxy S is near identicle to the 3G you're out of your mind and need to gtfo. Why are you trolls here anyway? This site isn't for you.

Nobody is accusing HTC or Motorola of copying? Have I slept through all of Apple's lawsuits?

We haven't seen Samsung's side of this case yet. I'm betting they will have some equally interesting insights into the company that Jobs built. He was the guy that openly advocated shameless copying & stealing right?

I'm not defending Samsung or Apple or anybody. I'm just pointing out my own personal observations. The dock cables you got me on. The international version anyway. But icons & grids & phone buttons? Nope. I'm not swayed.

Aside from our differences of opinion on this issue. I do appreciate now you will interact with us readers on your posts & other articles. It keeps the discussions lively. I hope your colleagues at AC start to follow suit. Forgive me if I sounded offensive in my comments. It wasn't my intention good sir.

Isn't patent infringement claims a form of copy accusation? I see it that way anyway. This vicious cycle can go on & on as long as some ridiculous patents keep getting granted & we argue about the boxes a product comes in.

I'll agree design from Samsung is boring & milk toast. I have never cared for the cheap plastic feeling of their phones. Their home appliances, washers-dryers, HDTVs etc... Totally different & all cutting edge tech. I have most all Samsung in my kitchen & a washer-dryer set & 3 of their TVs.

I've always heard imitation was the sincerest firm of flattery lol. Maybe that time has passed. Either way win or lose Apple vs Samsung is round one. When all innovation has stagnated because of patents & lawsuits we'll reconvene. But until I see Apple actually suffer real monetary or market damage, hasn't happened yet, these cries of copying & patent infringement are meaningless to me & people in the real world.

This happens on The Office when Dwight gets impersonated by Jim and says that impersonation is the highest form of flattery. Jim keeps going and then Dwight loses his mind. That scene is what I think of when this stuff happens.

But, Rob, they aren't meaningless in the real world. On either side of the equation they aren't meaningless. For small shops the threat of patent infringement both drives them to innovate and scares the daylight out of them. For bigger shops, not being able to let the market decide whether their hard research and development efforts are a success or failure prevents them from investing as much in R&D, which decreases innovation. You have latched onto the phrase "Good artists borrow, great artists steal" but I fear you're either misunderstanding the real meaning behind the short, catchy quote, or you're selectively using it to bolster an argument. Take a look at the debate among artists over that phrase: http://arthistory.about.com/b/2009/01/26/good-artists-borrow-great-artis... The art community considers "stealing" to mean taking an idea (not an implementation) and internalizing it, letting it influence future art from them. It's a way of simplifying what would otherwise take a lot of words to express. Stealing an idea about aging a painting, for example, not stealing the entire visual experience that was to be seen in a painting that was aged artificially. I don't know which ideas Samsung "stole" from Apple, but I know from Apple's court documents they consider the preponderance of copied implementations to be an affront to them. It isn't just a green background on a phone, or a sunflower in a photo app, or whatever or whatever, it's all of them together that has Apple turning to the courts for help in protecting their work. Apple is harmed monetarily by the success of Samsung's copying efforts: Samsung (okay the carriers, but the cost basis flows backwards) offer other phones on Buy One Get One Free offers, which while it hurts profitability, help in market share, both numerically and in taking business away from competitors. That's fine. That's legal. But the reason they can take the profit hit is because they don't have as much invested in R&D. Their business model requires them to let major innovation come from others first, then copy it (I would argue without really understanding it, which is what the artists mean when they say "steal"), and market it like crazy. Samsung is clearly good at iterating product design, and there's a lot to be said for doing that. By quickly introducing slight design changes they keep things fresh and may actually work towards "better" designs faster than Apple's approach of doing design iterations in the labs and sticking with a winning design longer. But fundamentally, Apple is damaged by Samsung's copying -- at least the expectation remains that the jury will judge that to be true.

I'm sorry your wrong. Samsung has been doing that. The problem is Apple likes to claim a shape as it's own. Android nor Touch Wiz, has anything to do with iOS. Apple "The Mighty Apple" has been guilty of copying software companies. My example would be Sherlock, Notifications (in iOS), and iMessage. The very idea that Apple is the one true originator of ideas is stupid.

And you fall back to same invalid "divide and conquer" tactic - don't address the entire design made up of many elements, just pick out one because by itself, out of context, seems inconsequential. Apple is not claiming a shape, they are claiming the use of several design elements that they spent lots of time and effort in their choosing and assembly to make a coherent design that results in a positive user experience.

What you are doing is plucking a single design element and saying "big deal." By itself, not a big deal - combined with others, a very big deal that has a material effect on sales and user experience.

Nobody said Apple was the one true originator of ideas. If you think Apple copied something, go start a blog and state the reasons they did so, and have a debate there.

So many times I've heard people say that they wish Samsung would make a truly original design but I honestly just don't see how they could do that and be successful. All successful smartphones (iPhone, Galaxy S3, HTC One X, Lumia 900) are focused around a large touchscreen on a more or less rectangular frame. Rene, you mentioned that the Galaxy Note was a start with the stylus, but I, and many other people I know for that matter, would not even consider a phone with a stylus. What could Samsung realistically do that would be different enough to constitute "innovation" in your mind?

Anyone who thinks innovation on the touchscreen form factor isn't possible at this point should take a good look at the Nokia Lumia 900 (which you mentioned without grasping the significance of it). Whether you like it or not, or can stand Windows Phone, you have to admit that it is a very unique and striking design. Unfortunately, it is crippled by an OS that isn't quite up to the level of iOS and Android. Put ICS or JB on that hardware, and I would pick one up in a heartbeat. I think many, many other buyers would, as well.

At least the S3 is unique, but Nokia absolutely proved that there is still room for design innovation in the mobile phone space. Companies just need to stop being lazy and put more effort into the industrial design and materials (another weak spot with Samsung) of their products.

As for the guy earlier commenting about HTC and Moto, and Apple suing them, I believe that all of those suits centered around software and utility patents, not trade dress. Big difference. Like cat-dog, apple-orange difference. HTC's One line, while not as successful from a sales standpoint, is vastly superior to the S3 from an industrial design and materials standpoint. It looks nothing like an iPhone. It stands on its own, and looks good doing it. As for Moto, everyone knows they are struggling financially, but that isn't because of their design capibities. You certainly can't accuse them of copying anyone else, as none of their products have looked like anything from Apple. From the original iPhone on, they have always stood apart.

So, maybe Rene is right. Maybe copying and patterning is a huge part of Samsung's success. Say what you all will about litigation, but it is very clear that Samsung has learned to differentiate themselves from Apple at this point thanks to it. So, it has definitely had an effect

Good article but other than the iPhone 4 what in the past 2 years has apple really made that was truly one of a kind? Hopefully this makes Samsung use stock android from here on out or build a better skin but I think overall either way its a win for consumers and android. IOS and the iPhone are kind of stale lately and apple suing and possibly getting Samsung to change may actually hurt Apple more than they think. I ,mean the sgs3 already runs great with Samsung touchwiz on top. If they are forced to go stock that most likely will make for faster updates which is about all apple fanboys use to try and bash android. Will be interesting to see how the case turns out and how Samsung if they lose change it up.

I'm constantly amazed at the Android and/or Samsung fans who throw out the "fanboy" term at will like its still 2005... yet hypocritically turn a huge blind eye to the copy-cat that Samsung has become. You can't have it both ways, sorry. So many Fandroids have lost complete credibility based on their constant argument that there is no copying going on here. They argue Samsung "innovates" and Apple does not. Want to know who the true fanboy is my friends? Look in a mirror because you are obviously NOT looking around and using common sense.

I'd love to see a Samsung that could do something special on its own, but I would not bet on it. I do not believe they have a culture capable of thinking without copying. Its too bad. Whats worse are the likes that hate on Apple yet cheer on this type of sad company. Sure they probably make the best Android phones out there, but only because they copy the iPhone. You should want someone to do this on their own for once... then you could gloat. Until then, its just pure blindness and a fanboyism worse than any Apple fanboyism out there.

I removed the last 2 Samsung products from my home last month. Boycott Samsung.. at least until they stop SamSucking.

Hey Rene. You're much too kind. Ignore the idiots calling your writing fanboysm. Samsung has the imaginagition of a doorknob. Being disrespectfully to the doorknob here. This company comes to dominate some markets by flooding these markets with mostly copies of other ppls work and effort. They have the means to put out new crap every couple of weeks knowing that the majority of consumers are not knowledgeable about these products and depend on friends or worse sales people to recommend what they should buy. Depending on others who may have a vested interest (commissions) or lack the sense of knowing something that is a pleasure to use and was created by ppl who are passionate about what they do. The sheep aren't the ppl who buy Apple products they are the ones that buy the cheapest or the biggest or the fastest. I've had Apple in my home since 1984 and also suffered through the mediocracy of MS for a few years. Like I said you were too kind to Sammy. But it is what it is...

The only thing I get from all that apple-rene-Samsung nonsense is one word, FEAR!

Apple knows better than no one that Samsung is getting too much bigger and better than apple.

And to correct your baby-fanboy article, Samsung is not the leader of android phones, Samsung is the world leader in phones in general, they sell more phones than all combined, yes including Apple soo there is only one conclusion of all this, Samsung is the king of electronics!

We are talking about PHONES AND TABLETS not other electronics Apple doesn't even produce, wait till they release a TV and then we can talk about electronics, like it or not the iPhone and iPad are the best out there and you will deal!.

Have you seen the Galaxy Tab sales figures that Samsung revealed in court?

37k total.

Apple doesn't fear that. They're suing to protect themselves against any and all copying. Just in case a more competent competitor than Samsung ever appears. (Though it might already be too late. iPad is already deeply entrenched in consumer electronics and corporate IT.)

Re: "Hitching their design train to Apple's engine has helped make Samsung the most successful Android manufacturer on the face of the earth, and the only truly profitable one."

Tell that to HTC. Their Q2 2012 profits were down 58% from the year-ago quarter, primarily due to competition from Apple and yes, Samsung. That makes three consecutive quarters of declining profits. And the Taiwanese government might need to bail them out.

As recently as last year, HTC was the world's #2 Android handset maker. Their handsets were profitable. Not any more. Huawei might have passed them already. (And don't anybody try to tell us that the One X will save HTC. As if yet another me-too phone would make a difference.)

You go Rene show everyone how original Samsung is and we are talking about phones, tablets not TVs or any other products, I'm with you on this one The Galaxy phones are a cheap rip-off the iPhone, look at the windows phone completely different I even like it but when a I see a Galaxy phone I get mad cause they're a cheap version of the iPhone.

Yeah I'm ready to get attacked cause the iPhone doesn't have stupid widgets or LED notifications.

Nice post Rene. And, um, maybe you can put at least one pass through MS Word's grammar checker or have someone else read it to catch the grammar errors. It will make your posts even nicer. ;)

Samsung is indeed a fast follower. They basically have a similar looking device for many a trendy device out there. In addition to Treos and Blackberrys, there was the Samsung G800/G810, a copy of the Nokia N95 style phone. Then there was the Samsung V740 which was the Motorola Razr competitor. If you think "BlackJack" was blatant. Sprint and Samsung called the V740 the "Blade". At least with these phones, even though they were phones of the same category, the trade dress wasn't "lawsuit" close. (I kind of loved the names back in the day. Katana was a phone. Too bad there wasn't a Rapier or other names involving instruments of death).

They continue to copy Apple in 2012, even after the lawsuit started. The Samsung Galaxy Ace Plus, released in 2012, is basically a KIRF of the iPhone 3GS, even moreso than the Galaxy S1. It is the closest clone to the 3GS yet. The Galaxy Ace Plus will undoubtedly be included in a future lawsuit.

There is no excuse whatsoever for Samsung to make the ChromeBox look like a Mac mini. Google is probably just as responsible for this as Samsung. There just isn't any excuse whatsoever. As far as I'm concerned, the ChromeBox should be part of a trade dress lawsuit too.

The KIRFing of the wall adaptor and the packaging and the 30-pin dock connector is just stupid. Yes, PDMI is a clone of the 30-pin dock connector. It's an open standard, but an open standard designed to copy Apple's success with the 30-pin dock connector. I have no idea why they would choose a wall adaptor design that looks as close to Apple's as possible, except it is black. Same with the ChromeBox. The dimensions and shape are quite close, but it just happens to be a different color.

Oh, and there's a hugely incriminating document that was entered as evidence into the trial. Because a Samsung lawyer slipped up and mentioned the "crisis of design" when he was questioning a witness. Samsung fought long and hard to keep this document away from the jury, but the lawyer's screw-up made it admissible:

"Relative Evaluation Report on S1, iPhone" lists 126 iOS design elements, with specific details on how Samsung could improve Android's UI to more closely resemble (and function more like) iOS. It's part of Samsung's response to the "crisis of design" triggered by the release of the original iPhone.

And yes, this is just the first of many potential Apple vs. Samsung trials. Apple is doing the world a favor. If Apple wins, maybe Samsung will stop relentlessly copying refrigerator, TV, home electronics, and all other competing designs they are currently imitating. Maybe companies in other industries can start to sue Samsung (or sue them more often and more successfully.)

Listen, genius. I can speak for many of the respondents here that your stay here is, well, let me be blunt, over. It appears you have nothing else going on in your life that you have time to post and argue every freakin point that from someone that you are not in agreement with. And how many times did you post? The fact that you cannot concede anything speaks volumes about you.....you must be a blast at parties!

You seem to be a lonely person that needs to get laid. Sorry, can't help you there. And if I did try and help you, you would probably bore her / or him? to death with your genius takes.

I'll be brutally honest here -- if you're trolling this post you DON'T love Android. Anyone who truly loves Android, myself included, would love to see Samsung ditch the duplication and really show off what a company their size and wealth could really do.

i can honestly say the fandroids aren't listening if they fully understood or even read the full article you specifically said you would love to have a samsung product in your arsenal of gadgetry but they are unoriginal hence you not wanting to have anything to do with them besides giving them respect in the design of their galaxy note they just see all the ugly samsung is doing and bash you because you are shedding light on this subject i didn't realize how much samsung copied other companies until this article and i can finally see them for who they are and what they are which is UNORIGINAL

There is just as much trolling going on from those that claim to love Apple in this post Rene. If you truly love Apple, you don't automatically give them a pass & preach their talking points as gospel. That is equally dishonest.

Just read several of the comments above that are all conjecture & even hate filled for examples.

Rene... Glad you are positive... The road you hope Samsung takes represents a bright and fruitful one... It's just from another time displacement.

Samsung, HTC, Toyota, Nissan, Lenovo and almost every other technology market participant from Asia follows THEIR PLAN, one - some of it based on their culture, and some of it based on their belief of how the rest of he world views THEIR ( the foreign entity) buying habits

Asian technology companies almost without exception NEVER invent or innovate. They procure ideas from others, regardless of the means required. They may try to reduce that innovatition to it's lowest, usable form, and produce BILLIONS of identical copies of that item, at almost no cost, and snatch a piece of a market where those 'widgets' are used and flood that market until it's theirs. The more complicated the device the better. It gives them more time to understand the new technology, how to build it better than the original designers, once again how to squeeze every nickel out of the cost, and build billions. They are dong what the west did between 1935-1980, and it seems then - we just stopped trying.. So materials, and methods, an training for those various methods of innovation just vanished. Especially in the US. It's all been outsourced. Samsung has taken in that very same thing to a wide variety of our daily tools, blasted them back to us by the millions and we bought it. Coffee makers to cars to refrigerators and tires. It's an unstoppable force we created.

In dealing with the Asians over then last 40 years has solidified my view the they DO NOT want to create anything. Taking someone else's idea and doing it better than the original inventor is their way. We can't change it - why should we? Most western consumers have adopted a 'good enough' attitude across almost all aspects of their lives and seem to do just fine..

Many of us will keep innovating on a grand scale but will fall on our face in the mud when it comes to building it. The Asians will procure our intellectual property, build the 'just good enough' product for the world.

So by appealing to you to moderate some comments I've attacked you or iMore in some way? Okay if that's what makes you happy I guess.

I'm using the above post as an example of the ridiculous rhetoric that gets passed around. A very broad brush is used to paint Asians almost entirely as backward, stupid, sub-human cultures. I believe that does include Samsung. They are a Korean company right? And I can only conclude the author of that comment is a devoted Apple customer here on an Apple centric blog.

Except the back of the chrome book looks nothing like the apple one. But anymore anything square or rectangular to the apple faithful must be a copy. And I'm not saying Samsung didn't copy but you're grasping at straws with the chrome book.

The above was neither anti-Samsung OR anti-Asian AT ALL !!! It was intended to highlight how the process of bringing products to market vary from culture to culture over time. The culture of the West evolved MUCH faster than it did in the east. As the west continues to strive and out-invent everyone else-that played a role. The eastern cultures wanting to further themselves saw an advantage in picking up And doing what we wouldn't do or couldn't do, and pursued that arc of work to make themselves productive .. This, to me, sounds like a global team ready for the next gerater good!

This sounds like a grand plan for full on coop-i-tuition. But either way, it sounds like a plan for a full-tilt integrated plan we build for COLLECTIVISM. Bazillions of products have been thought up but squandered because the collective pieces didn't exist. We now have a collective way to do that. Use our collective strengths to move our collective selves forward by combining our cultures strengths. Deal with the differences, no matter how difficult, and keep our eyes firmly on our collective future..

Anti-anything is a pure excessive pitfalls of pettiness.. Given our global situation, we don't have a lot of time to waste. Draw your sweat-band tight. It's a long perlious trail.

I can't even stomach most of the comments because of all the personal attacks going on, so instead of arguing with trolls, here's my contribution: clip from The Office when Jim impersonates Dwight -- I think it fits nicely.

I have had an iPhone 3gs, 4, and 4s (my current phone which I admittedly love). I've also owned a Samsung Galaxy S (Captivate-- total POS but I think all early Androids were), Galaxy S2 and a Galaxy S3 as well as a few Blackberries and a Windows phone. I don't consider myself a "fanboy" of any sort. Its obvious Samsung models their devices after iPhones. They are blatantly trying to capitalize on the popularity of the iPhone. A lot of companies do. Look at how many products have an "i" in front of the name-- even products that have nothing to do with mobile phones at all. However, to say that Samsung doesn't innovate at all is total BS. The GS3 has a lot of cool tweaks built into it. Just two small examples-- if you like to use the alarm on your phone, you can set it to "brief" you in the morning instead of using a traditional alarm sound. The phone will wake you up by announcing the time and you can choose to have it also announce the current weather and breaking headlines. I think thats cool. Also, if you are texting someone and then just decide to call them instead, all you have to do is lift the phone to your ear mid-text and it dials that person automatically. The only reason I point these things out is for the people who haven't actually tried a Samsung phone recently. And those are just two examples of many. Anyway, I think they are "copying" Apple to some degree, but then they really do a great job of adding cool features like that. Also, look at the fact that they have embraced NFC technology at least since the GS2 (maybe before that, idk) and you better believe in the Fall Tim Cook will stand up on stage and announce the next iPhone will have NFC and the clouds will part, the beams of sun will shine down on him, the angels will sing, and people with pee their pants with joy. Apple seems to be a little more conservative with their innovations whereas Samsung seems to try to push it a little more. Maybe they have a lot of time on their hands after stealing Apple's designs? LOL. I really would like to see Apple a little more aggressive with their innovations from one iPhone model to the next. Finally, I don't think Apple is innocent in the stealing department either. As another poster pointed out, all you have to do is look at iMessage (BBM, anyone?) and the drop-down notifications (Hello, Android!) to see that.

Leo Laporte would totally disagree with your article. He maintains on many of his podcasts that the Apple v. Samsung case is Apple being ridiculous and patenting the rectangle. That Apple is panicking because Samsung is taking market share from them -not because Samsung is copying their technologies.

Be careful with Leo. I'm not quite sure he reveals any real opinions. He's trying to be entertaining and a lot of that is part of his script or him leading the show to be this or that way. He currently plays an "admitted Android fanboy" and will take some crazy positions for the sake of the show. Whether he really believes some of those ideas is a totally different matter.

Samsung hasn't taken any market share from Apple. Samsung has taken market share from Nokia, but not Apple. Apple's iPhone strategy is currently self limiting to lower unit market share. Apple knows it and likes it that way. Even so, Apple's market share has steadily grown and has not decreased save for cyclical changes.

I doubt that he is scripting anything off air but he is very inconsistent. And it is very clear that he will take different positions based on the show or maybe his whims.

He will act less knowledgeable to give someone else a chance to explain something. He has praised Microsoft for something on Windows weekly and then criticize them for it when he is on Twit.

I think he is internally inconsistent and that this plays out on the air. I think some of it is just that he's human but I think the other part is, as the other commenters said, he wants to entertain and be entertaining.

I'm a faithful imore reader and an apple fan who recently switched from an iphone 4 to the galaxy note. Why? Because it has innovative features that I've been looking for apps for since 2007, including the way it handles handwriting recognition. I didn't suddenly become an android fan but this device has things it does that I use in real world business settings so it just made since. The in between phone and tablet stature of this phone also has removed the necessity i had to carry an iphone and ipad daily as well. I still use my ipad at home and when i travel but the note reduced what i keep in my briefcase. I would consider this one to be quite innovative

If a device was a copy of another device as a whole, I would understand wanting to sue over trying to wholly imitate your device, but using common elements is really trivial. Watch this TED talk about remixing....which is what all vendors (Apple included) is really doing. Link:http://youtu.be/zd-dqUuvLk4

So these "common elements" were so umiportant and obvius that Samsung created an 132 page internal document describing parts (even very minute ones) of the iPhone UI they themselves deemed superior?? Get a grip man!

The fact that Samsung is the type of company that it is has nothing to do with Apple other than the fact that Apple is the company that stood up and said "we're not going to take this crap!" I don't care if you hate Apple as a company for whatever reason you do, if you cannot separate from your hatred of Apple in order to judge Samsung by it's own merits, then you aren't even an Android lover in my opinion, you're just an idiot. This has nothing to do with Apple innovating or not innovating, and has nothing to do with whether you think that there's no room for innovation so that makes it okay to copy. So what if other companies choose to license their patents, does that automatically make it a requirement for Apple or any other company to do so if they choose not to? These comments sound like they are from the kids of my generation who got a trophy even though they were on the losing team, just because nobody wanted to tell them they were losers. Now as an adult you feel entitled to all the shit that you didn't put in the hard work, sweat and tears for. It's time for you to realize that that's not how things work in the grown-up world...

Agree with Rene. The only thing I wonder is why Palm or HP or whoever owns those palm patents have never used them. Apple walked right over them designing the iphone. Samsung has as well it seems, even more so. Even RIM blatantly stole from webOS.

Great article. Glad to see someone has the balls to publish a little truth. I've had 4 different Samsung phones ranging from their basic feature phone to their top of the line smart phones and one thing is for sure, they didn't copy quality. All were junk, and all had to be replaced multiple times.

Something else that crosses my mind with these Samsung vs. Apple copying things is... why do we keep discussing the first Galaxy S??? That phone came out over 2 years ago! Why don't we discuss the current Samsung products???

As I said above... Samsung products have come a long way. We should start talking about their current or atleast more recent products.

Because that device was as close to a rip off as you can get and they profited from it and continue to do so due to the following it has received. How many people have gone from the S I to the S II to the S III?

I may not agree with the lawsuits as there is usually convergence in the tech field but it is a little naughty of Samsung to think they could get away with it and preposterous to walk into court saying we did not copy.

Also, to answer someone's question above as to how to Samsung can create something truly unique? Look no further than BlackBerry and their flow concept. It is original and fresh and while it might not piggy back off iOS and might not garner a following in record time due to it being unfamiliar it remains theirs and their place will have been earned not copied.

Furthermore, insinuating that Apple has copied others (which they have) as a deterrent to what Samsung have done is ignorant at best. It is one thing to copy a notification centre or a standard (for which licence fees are paid) but another completely to go to great lengths to make your platform as similar as humanly possible.

Rene, you are officially perpetuating the Apple insult to fanatic levels. The premise of the insult is that Apple believes a customer can neither read the word Samsung, nor recognize a logo of an Apple. I can tell an Apple product from a Samsung product, just as I can tell a Ford from a Chevy, even though they make amazingly similar products. Shocking as it may seem, but competition drives innovation. I find your bandwagon antics to be nothing more than sensationalism for cheap site hits.
Obviously Samsung has kept Apple from being the most profitable company in US history. I own Apple products like you do, I just think that Apple is wasting their time and money garnishing negative attention in the courtroom, meanwhile the competitors are literally out innovating them. What the courtroom dramas are showing us is that Apple cannot keep up and are resorting to the lowest common denominator of our courts. I personally will not choose another iOS device if the courtroom aftermath leaves the iOS device as the only product legally available. Call me weird but I want more than one choice when it comes to my purchase. Apple should just continue to make great products and let their merit be chosen by the consumer..

I've had Apple products for a very long time and they've never had the best specs when compared to the competition. Only recently have they been pushing display technology to the next level with their retina displays on a relatively large screens. This is true innovation which will lead to real world benefits.

Samsung on the other hand has taken Apple ideas and incorporated it in its own shiny package and have again done so with S Voice. Sure voice technology is nothing new but Apple was first to make it part and parcel of their platform.

So what innovations has Apple's competitors brought to the table? Their competition is going to great lengths to emulate their ecosystem, ergo they're still playing catch up while including some bells and whistles in their products.

"Sure voice technology is nothing new but Apple was first to make it part and parcel of their platform."

Are you kidding me? Is that some kind of joke?! Android has had full voice integration, including voice search using a little microphone button, since the earliest versions of the OS! The only thing Apple did first was market the capability as a premier feature.

Claiming that Apple was the "first to make it part and parcel of their platform" is a f'n joke!

Android had Siri like capabilities where you could request actions from the home screen instead of in-app, and the phone/personality actually responded using voice technology while at the same time having the capability to remember locations and relationships in the earliest versions of their OS?

I wish I had read this article before I bought into the S3 hype. I upgraded from my iPhone 4s and the S3 is a dog. Yes it is fast but there are just some issues just cannot get over.
The screen is big and that's nice but man it just cannot take the sun at all. WiFi is hit or miss. connectivity is hit or miss. My BB 9900 has none of these issues and the 4s never did. What is really awesome is you go to the forums for help with these issues and only things you find is, root or mod your phone, that will fix it. Really? so now I am stuck with a hunk of Samsung junk for 2 years.

All you people bashing Rene or Ally are just plain ignorant. THIS IS A BLOG SITE! It is opinions of people. Just because you don't agree with the content you don't have to personally attack the writers. If you don't like the opinions, then remove imore.com or tipb.com from your favorites. Otherwise why not just post why you disagree and just leave it at that. Sheesh all this hatred over Apple vs. Non-Apple.

It's okay to have an opinion article... but on a site such as this you still expect a certain level of professionalism. People's opinions get made and swayed by articles such as this... so they shouldn't be mislead.

I think it's pretty impossible to confuse Samsung mobile products with Apple products. That's not the point. The point is that the average person seeing these Samsung products will believe that they are "as good as" or "better" than Apple products and buy them on that premise. The copying isn't designed to trick anyone into buying Samsung thinking it's Apple. The trick is to equate Samsung with Apple. But once you get past the "They're fanbois who stand in line for Apple products" dig in the ads, the GS3 is portrayed as being "better" than Apple by having "picture sharing" and "video sharing", that iPhones can't do.

I'd also like to point out that expressing differences of opinion in a civil and sane manner is the difference between maturity and the need for therapy. Keep in mind that this is an Apple news site and if you don't like Apple products or the articles posted here, you don't have to read them. Personally attacking anyone here for a perspective that differs from yours is unnecessary. This isn't Syria, China, or North Korea, but your right to free speech doesn't have to go down the road of chaos and insanity.

iMore is part of a group of sites covering all the flavours of the mobile world (they actually call it Mobile Nations) which I consider really positive, so I read most of them. Rene is sometimes a guest on Android Central, which is how things should be and why I read this site.

This case has polarised the technology user community in a negative way, for pretty obvious reasons. We should be able to discuss things openly, though I agree that discussion should be civil and reasonable.

I use a Samsung Galaxy S2 every day (16Gb + a 16Gb card), the 4.0.3 is less than perfect - 4.1 would be a nice touch. Overall it has proved solid, the 2000mAh battery often has 30% left at 48 hours and even dropping it seems to be tolerated unless your really stupidly careless. I prefer the bigger screen, the Wifi & 3G reception are solid, sound and call quality are great, the camera is OK and it is quite compact. When I look at my other Samsung products they also seem very solid and user friendly. In short - why not?

A thought experiment: If I had bought an iPhone 4 instead (the 4s did not exist when I bought my phone) it would have cost about 30-40% more, had less space and broken the first time it was dropped. Call quality would be inferior (even the supplied white headphones are crap) and I would be forced to use the iTunes (no thanks). Add to that poor antenna design, a smaller screen, no expandable memory, it even weighs more and looks ugly. . . . So I seriously ask Rene "what is better about this product?" On screen Keyboard? Actually no . . . and SwiftKey even improves on that, plus a get a bigger screen. Sorry, I could not think of anything about the iPhone 4 even "as good as" the S2.

If Samsung just copy Apple; why don't they have all the same design mistakes and idiotic materials choices? If anything Samsung hardware is what Apple COULD have produced, if they hired a decent design team and did the job properly. Samsung also create quality products in some 12 sectors which Apple don't touch. Apple don't even make a TV! Just a silly little box. As a company they do make a lot of money; but mainly by ripping off it's terminally gullible fans.

Rene - I have to conclude that Apple are a second rate design house, considerably behind Samsung in the smart phone sector. In Tablets Apple are doing OK relative to Samsung, but then even ASUS can out design Apple in that sector. One has to ask "what kind of fool buys Apple equipment?" It must be people who are blinded by the logo, it seems to suppress peoples critical faculties, leading to them being fleeced by these Californian shysters. Do you think that is why they always turn to the courts to kill off any real competition?

To be honest I really expect to be one of the very few on this site that are critical of Apple; but comments above suggest that I am now part of the majority here, what a surprise! Perhaps people are simply sick of this topic, they now consider it boring - unless they actually disagree with your position and (by extension) Apple's actions.

Rene, I first visited this site about 18 months ago, because I follow your sister sites and their podcasts. Because of all that I know how capable you are and how much you care about design. Please look at Apple and other products without preconceptions. I grant you that Android is not as smooth as iOS, but in most other respects it is now the more capable OS. Far from being simple "copies", many Samsung and HTC phones make the iPhone 4s look 2 years out of date! Mainly because it really is.

That situation could only happen because Samsung actually are WAY ahead of the products you claim are being ripped off. How weird is that! Meanwhile Apple point to a few icon designs (now years old) and scream "Copy" over and over again laud as hell, until someone agrees with them.

I suggest quite seriously that this company do not deserve your blind support. If Apple launch a decent phone in a few weeks - go for it! But articles like this are not worthy of you man, not even close.

Could you clarify that please cardfan. Do you think I am totally wrong, or do you agree with any of my points?

I find the whole Apple-v-Samsung situation utterly crazy - it is painful. These are huge corporations with an annual trading relationship in billions of dollars; why in hell cant they find a way to resolve matters without this "legal version" of the Cuban Missile crisis.

You are becoming a joke. What is your Samsung vs. non-Samsung article ratio by this point. When I find the time I'll look into it, but I'm sure it'd be pretty embarassing. As Editor-in-Chief you should be held at a higher standard that what your recent articles have demonstrated. iMore used to be the place to go for the latest and greatest iProduct news, but you're severely tarnishing it.

Might I suggest renaming the site, maybe "iHateSamsung - Your one Stop Shop for Samsung Bashing Using Half-True "Research" That Could Be Done Better By A Grade School Child With Access to Google"

I know it's a mouthful, but then again, at least your readers would know what they're getting themselves into.

It's funny how you hold Rene to a higher standard using the ole "as Editor-in Chief" argument and yet give Samsung a pass by turning a blind eye. Why should Samsung not be held to a higher standard like Rene is talking about in his article? In my opinion Rene is doing what he's supposed to be doing.....Samsung is not...

Stop insinuating that every smartphone company in the world somehow owes their existence to the iPhone. I'm pretty sure no one even noticed the similarities between the icons until you pointed them out, and I'm using the word "similarities" judiciously. What a waste of time your article was.

Some of the points here are certainly on their face, valid. But I think taken in a vacuum.

Some things seem a bit of a stretch. Comparing an icon for "photos" which is a clear sunflower on iOS to a few orangish petals of a flower in the background on an app called "gallery" for instance.

Then we move on to things that do look similar, but probably for a good reason. Is the fact Samsung made a clock icon look like an analog clock face a copy of iPhone? The Clock application on the Amiga Operating system released on the Amiga 1000 in 1985 looked, you guessed it, like an analog clock face (http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/desktop/full/amigaos10.png). Some things are just obvious to look like certain things.

Then, also some things become ubiquitous. Like the steering wheel as how a car is steered. You don't need a manual to figure out which pedal is which in the car. I think with phones the industry moves in a similar way because like with cars people will move from one model to the other and have to have some familiarity with basic functioning of the device. To illustrate this, on can ask the question why did Apple make the phone call icon green and place it on the left side? Look at the Blackberry picture in this same article and you can see that for the longest time mobile phones had the call button in green, on the left, and with a home phone receiver image on it!

So is Samsung copying Apple when Apple is copying the same thing from the numerous earlier model phones that came before iPhone, or the thing is just the obvious or has become the way that something will be represented in the industry? I'm betting that is a likely case for a lot of the other icons that are shown to be similar. Take contacts for instance. One could find a lot of prior art even before iOS for the icons for a PIM, address book or contacts application looking like an address book including, well, address books which look like address books!

Apple copied the notification bar in Android. Apple also copied the mouse and GUI from Xerox. Apple has also copied other things from other vendors such as Sony. This is such downright hypocrisy and even more silly when you talk about colors of icons, who cares about their colors or if they use a flower as well on their gallery icon!?!? Talk about nitpicking. Apple didn't invent the touch screen, they didn't invent cellular, they didn't invent voice recognition, they didn't invent really anything in the iPhone other than the OS. They use other manufactures technology, even the screens were produced by Samsung up till the upcoming iPhone 5! Apple just took a bunch of things that already exists and put them together into a nice working easy to use format. Apple needs to stop nitpicking silly like things like, "Their phone looks like ours". It's not important and all devices eventually settle to a single common shape (Phone's, computers, microwaves, TV's etc). If Apple wants to sue do it on something viable like technology infringements, not this design non-sense.

I think Rene made his case rather well. His points were were expressed not out of hate for Samsung, but out of respect for the company's technological and financial potential to inspire great design. Good post.

One of the most damning pics I saw was of their charger plug, not just the cord. It's the same cube shape and exact dimensions as Apple's innovative cube shaped USB wall plug. If you could add that pic to this article and MacDailyNews' pic
of the two phones and pads side by side (or maybe Conan's pic in his video of the same, you'd have the complete, complete picture.

Rene, Apple PAID Xerox to license their technology in the computer field, which Xerox only had interest in as it related to copiers and printers. Know your facts before you say Apple stole.

AND lifting one or two things and placing them into a whole new context is different than cloning someone's work in the exact same context and for the same purpose. Is not te same by a long shot. Is also why those companies don't come after Apple.

What both you and the article you cited failed to mention is that Apple *paid* Xerox for the right to use Xerox PARC's concepts in Apple's own implementation of same. No wonder Xerox lost that lawsuit...

By the way, the article you cited noted something that's very apropos to the current discussion. It stated, "Ronald S. Laurie, a copyright lawyer with Irell & Minella in Menlo Park, Calif., said Xerox's claim could be weakened because of the long delay in filing suit, some five years after the introduction of the Macintosh. 'There's a legal doctrine that you can't just sit around while someone's infringing your rights and not complain,' he said." In other words, Apple is obligated to defend its IP in regard to Samsung's blatant (and repeated) slavish copying. Apple's shareholders require no less.

And trade dress is a very legitimate application of Apple's patents. If they work for years to design something that collectively is unique, like the Coke bottle shape, which is not preordained as the only way to make a bottle, Apple should be able to shut down the me too's that most closely resemble and very nearly clone every aspect of Apple's design, software and functionality.

Not cool. They deserve to feel a lot of financial pain for their sins as far as I'm concerned.

I cannot open a burger joint with the exact same layout, colors, uniforms, foods, clown mascot and advertising as McDonalds and not expect a MASSIVE lawsuit. Just because people like their fake iPhones doesn't mean they're legal and actually belong on the market.

I totally agree with Rene on this. It isn't that Sammy hasn't invented things, they have, but they have obviously tried to copy as much of the details from others as possible to recreate the experience that other innovators have created before them. They have innovated some details, but not an entire system or experience. It is one thing to knock off a single attribute, but when you repeatedly replicate the bulk of the user experience then you have stolen that intangible sum of the parts that makes a product, painting, music, movie, etc unique.

Sammy seems to have taken Balmer's strategy to heart...last to innovate, first to replicate.

Some of you seem to think this is an attack on Android and that is not the case. Rene is merely pointing out that Samsung has potential to do so much for the industry but they decide to play it safe and just mimic/copy what's already out there. You can't innovate if all you're going to do is sit around and wait to see what others do and do the same thing.

Another point needs to be brought up here. If Apple is suing on the basis that Samsung copied the design of the iPhone rather than suing based on Samsung infringing on patents of specific technologies that aren't vague in description, that deals more with the "form" than the "function" of Samsung mobile products.. Simply claiming that Samsung's phones and tablet's look like Apple's, won't be good enough. It's pretty obvious in side by side pictures that there are similarities in Samsung's products that are "design based". IF however, Samsung phones and tablets provided the exact same user experience as Apple mobile products, Apple would win that argument, but the simple fact is while Samsung phones and Tablets may resemble the iPhone and iPad in hardware, Android does not look nor function like iOS. iOS is simpler and has no customization. Android looks and acts completely different and allows customization. So if Apple's lawsuit is about Samsung copying Apple "designs" and not about specific patent infringements in Samsung's user interface overlay that sits on top of Android, that's a very different topic because the product that Apple got banned for a short period of time was the Galaxy Nexus (which doesn't look like an iPhone), Jellybean doesn't act like iOS, and was it a Samsung Universal search function that brought that on, or was it a Google Jelly Bean Universal Search function that caused this? The first week of the trial seems to be more about the accusation that Samsung copied Apple hardware design than the functions of their software overlay and if they stick to that logic, they won't win because a million different TV's out there all have the same rectangular shape and operate the same way and TV manufacturer's aren't hogging courtrooms with frivolous "you copied the design of my product" lawsuits. Just a thought.

Rene Ritchie did, what I think was a good job of pointing out a trend in the "samsung culture" a long string of producing "also-ran" products. Something that is "good enough" and in mass on pricing rather than real features.

Far too many of you are missing the main point - it is the small details that point to a larger problem, as an artist with a small but very innovative manufacturer I can attest that the small details and features ARE EVERYTHING. I am watching this case closely because the results will directly impact my client, a manufacturer that has many of the same "copy-cat" problems and this case will for once-and-all give some direct president in how to handle this type of infringement.

Yes a square is a square, a TV is a TV, even a tablet is a tablet (and phone a phone) but this is not about "form factor" but the operative details and the ability of hard working people and the companies they work with to protect their work and present to the market what is actually important (outside of wal-mart price waring) - working features.

RIM, Nokia, Palm, Apple, etc, have all felt the Samsung burn, from their copiers.
Samsung do indeed make some great stuff, but it always seems to be directly influenced by their immediate rivals.
Why can't they create a killer product first?
That, is the point Rene is making.

I'm sorry but Apple has been every bit as guilty as to taking ideas of others and calling it it's own. So don't do unto others, what you wants others to do to you. I think that's the price of being the market leader, that people will follow your lead.

If you keep raising the bar because of your sheer innovation ability, trust me the pretenders will fade away eventually because they will always be one step behind. Well, Apple after Steve Jobs is starting to show that, instead of doing continuously raising the bar/setting the trend. They are now acting on defensive by suing anything that remotely looks like a shape.

I believe no one will confuse an iPhone for any of the Samsung Galaxy phones because the size in itself are different. Without the phones being switched on, you can already tell them apart. Anyone who have used either device will know that icons aside, the way how the phone functions is nothing alike. I mean how different can you expect it to be?

Well, no point debating about what already happened. Let me pose a more futuristic scenario. If Apple launches an iPad mini with a 7inch display, how does that change the whole landscape of this issue? There are many 7inch tablets but you don't see those companies suing each other. It would create the same scenario in reversal roles. Wouldn't it?

Anyone nerdy enough to post on a tech blog really can't say that they believe no one will confuse an iPhone for a Galaxy. I heard someone say to someone else the other day "Do you have an iPad? Yes, but not that one. I have a Samsung iPad."

If you think Apple copies too, then start a blog, write an article and we'll be happy to read it and comment on it.

@xtremez: "I'm sorry but Apple has been every bit as guilty as to taking ideas of others and calling it it's own."

No, Apple hasn't done so, but that's not the point in any case.

IP and trade dress infringement are not about "taking ideas." Doing so is both legal and even desirable from a societal point of view. It's the *expression* of ideas that can and should be protected, not the ideas themselves. This is what the current Apple-Samsung lawsuit is all about, i.e. Samsung slavishly copying Apple's EXPRESSION of the ideas embodied in Apple's devices. Are Samsung's supporters in this case wilfully blind or are they just being obtuse about this important distinction?

I can't believe they copied apple so hard by using a picture of a clock for their clock icon and a picture of a calculator for their calculator icon!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And that phone icon??????? What a BLATANT copy of Apple! No mobile phone has ever used a green button with a picture of a phone on it before!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! wait...

This is one of the saddest sets of comments I've read in a long time . . . kudos to you Rene, rob white et al go *itch somewhere else please, or at the very least keep the personal attacks and name-calling out of it.

I think samsung has had some little bits of innovation and have stolen from people being from large corporations or small developers. Apple directly stole the most popular iTunes wi-fi sync app from cydia they even took the exact icon used by the developer on cydia and made it black and white in the keynote for IOS 5. Which i admit is small feature that i would imagine is little used anymore. Apple could also have been said to have stolen some of the early notification centre layouts will looks very familiar to android users. I recognise these pale in comparison to people copying a market revolutionising entire product line of mobile devices but i feel that Apple is not a white knight or a damsel in distress in this situation. Apple has stolen and copied but the consistent copycatting of samsung is unacceptable and i hope that apple is granted another large sum of money and that samsung is put in a position where they must innovate or switch to becoming largely a fridge company, or whatever else they make. Innovation is being hurt and samsung is at fault for shameless and unethical behaviour and business practices

Renee, while I agree with the sentiment of your article I do believe it's missing a solid dose of humility and realism when processing these things in light of the industry as a whole... Everyone copies and then builds upon others in the industry... I mean let's be real here, you think the iOS notification shade was developed in a vacuum without design and functionality cues from Android? Apple borrows design cues both in hardware and software but when they do it is 'borrowing' and when others do it is stealing... Case in point, here is a picture of a Samsung phone from 2012... Look like any flagship released recently?